User talk:Lilijuros

Welcome!

Hi Lilijuros! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! — TheresNoTime (talk • she/her) 16:40, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TheresNoTime, thank you. Lilijuros (talk) 16:46, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Selfstudier (talk) 15:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'm aware Lilijuros (talk) 15:49, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AE

Youve been reported to arbitration enforcement, see WP:AE#Lilijuros. nableezy - 20:38, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for violating the WP:ARBECR in place in the topic area, even while the matter was being discussed at WP:AE, and more generally for perpetuating a battleground atmosphere, you have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 00:39, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

את יהודיה?@Tamzin Lilijuros (talk) 08:29, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

כן. But I don't see what that has to do with anything. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 11:32, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

היא גם תומכת בחיזבלנור כמו נבליזי, וחוסמת בסיטונאות כל מי שהוא לא פרו-פלשתינאי. תזהר פה., היא לא לטובתך. אתה צריך להתנצל ולהימנע מעריכות כלשהן על סכסוך ערבי-ישראלי עד שיש לך 500 עריכות. זה אחד מהשטיקים שמשממשים פה את הפרו-פלשתינאים לעיף מכאן עורכים יהודים. 37.48.32.132 (talk) 14:09, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin, I understand now my actions and realize I was under an agitation. I'm sorry and take responsibility for my actions. Yet, isn't a limit-less block to harsh compared to my comment? On the heb wikipedia in which I'm a senior and deedful user, such a hard response will never be enforced on such comment, but as a response to harder comments. 2A01:73C0:501:C153:0:0:6B8:DC1 (talk) 14:20, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lilijuros, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as 2A01:73C0:501:C153:0:0:6B8:DC1 (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. -Lemonaka‎ 14:42, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Geez, @Lemonaka, lighten up. How about this: Hey, Lilijuros, it looks like you sent the above message while logged out. Could you please confirm it was you? If you would like to have the IP redacted from our logs, please contact the Oversight team. And going forward please make sure to only edit while logged-in. Blocked editors should not be editing logged-out, even on their own talkpage. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 16:07, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin, was me. The reason I used the IP adress was because I was blocked from editing my talkpage as registered. Can you now relate to my answer? Lilijuros (talk) 23:24, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

do you speak hebrew by any case? that conversation would be easier this way Lilijuros (talk) 23:32, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

אני מדברת רק קצת עברית עכשיו. But fortunately your English seems very good. So, the reason I went with an indefinite block is that you were continuing to edit about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which non-extendedconfirmed users are categorically banned from, and many of your comments were provocative or disruptive. I would be open to unblocking you with an indefinite topic ban. Is that something you would be open to? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 20:09, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First, How exactly could I edit articles as almost all article in the conflict topic are under ECP protection, which even now prevents me from editing? Second, I was going over my contributions regarding the recent development talk-pages and so far found only 1 comment, that discussed one. how come 1 becomes "many"? Lilijuros (talk) 20:35, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All three of these comments [1] [2] [3] were disruptive. And right now we don't have the luxury of giving editors in the ARBPIA area a lot of space to learn civility. If I unblock you with a TBAN, I'd be very open to unbanning after 3-6 months of constructive editing in other topic areas. (And if I'm unavailable to review a ban appeal at that juncture, you can quote me on this to any other admin.) I don't think I can convince myself to do an unqualified unblock here, but if that's what you have your heart set on, you can write up an appeal, tell me whether you would like it posted to WP:AN (appeal to whole community) or WP:AE (appeal to admin team), and I will post it there for you. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 21:23, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just as an FYI, Lilijuros, an indefinite block (what you called a "limit-less block") doesn't mean forever, here on enwiki. It isn't seen as more harsh than, say, a two-week block. It only means "until you convince someone to unblock you". That's not just a semantic difference, it really does simply mean the block can be for five minutes, if that's all it takes to convince someone you understand the problem you're causing, agree to address it, and some admin believes you're sincere. (And if I'm following the case correctly, I think Tamzin actually did you a favor here by indeffing you before the AE case ended, as I think it means she can lift the block herself. She's offering to do that, if you'll agree to a topic ban that means you are not to edit articles which fall in the contentious topic of the Arab-Israeli conflict until you've appealed that topic ban. Be aware this is generally very broadly construed.) Valereee (talk) 23:14, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I beg your pardon Tamzin, but calling comments 1,3 "disruptive", is way over rated (ignoring that 1 was a demmand to provide a source to an anonymous projective comment and 3 is a non ad hominem critic). In fact, if someone'd have thought so, they'd have already complain and we'd already see such a discussion before yours. The fact that no one has complained only prooves it, or furthermore, i was backed later by an editor in comment 1. Lilijuros (talk) 09:01, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My offer is what it is. Again, if you'd prefer pursuing an unconditional unblock, let me know and I can submit the appeal for you. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 04:17, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

so it be than. Lilijuros (talk) 12:01, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Please write an appeal and say which of the two noticeboards you would like to send it to. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 15:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand now my actions and realize I was under an agitation. Such comment will no longer be written again.

For for WP:AE. Lilijuros (talk) 15:58, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I won't stand in the way of posting that if you have your heart set on it, but one-sentence appeals usually fail. But of course I am biased. @Valereee: Do you have any advice? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 16:21, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd recommend something a bit more thoughtful. And, Lilijuros, I think it's important that you realize that a failed appeal at a noticeboard means the block is endorsed (and possibly imposed) by the community. I would recommend you take Tamzin up on her offer of an indef from the topic, which (if I'm following this whole process correctly, please correct me if not) being placed by an individual admin can also be lifted by one. An appeal rejected by the community might turn into a block that can only be appealed to the community and can be much, much harder to get. Valereee (talk) 16:43, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

okay, I'd appriciate it if you'd unblock the indefinite topic ban. Lilijuros (talk) 22:03, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear about what we're agreeing on here, Lilijuros, you're requesting that I unblock you and impose a topic ban from the Arab-Israeli conflict broadly construed, with an understanding that I am open to lifting that topic ban after 3 to 6 months of active, non-disruptive editing in other topic areas, correct? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 16:13, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin. Indeed. Lilijuros (talk) 16:15, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for working with me on this. I have unblocked you (exact wording of TBAN here), and I hope to be able to accept an unban request in due time (where you fall on the 3–6 month range should depend on how active you are). Happy editing, and if you have any questions, please let me know. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 17:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Warning - Topic Ban Violation

On November 11, 2023, Tamzin imposed a topic ban of the Arab-Israel conflict, broadly construed, as a condition for you being unblocked.

You violated your topic ban today be initially making this edit as well as the two edits ([4], [5]) on Selfstudier's user talk page. To be 100% clear and using the last sliver of good faith, let me inform you that a topic ban applies to all parts of Wikipedia. You may not make any edits anywhere related to the Arab-Israel conflict per WP:TBAN. There are limited exceptions outlined at WP:BANEX. This is your only warning. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:13, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

na ja, seems like Oceania has won in this case. How unfortunate... Lilijuros (talk) 18:17, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please trust that other editors will correct errors when they occur. It may not be immediate, but on topics where there are many people watching things get fixed quickly. Please focus your efforts on other areas of Wikipedia until your topic ban expires. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:19, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Than please explain me, in my own talk page, (very hopeful that this doesn't violate your whatever bans), how come it isn't a contradiction when one article clearly states The Hamas is the sovergning entity of the Gaza strip, and the other clearly states Israel is the only one? Lilijuros (talk) 18:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is one. And it should be addressed. But because of your topic ban and past disruptive editing, you need to let other people handle it. You are not factually wrong. But the condition for allowing you to continue editing on Wikipedia was that you would not edit in this topics, even when you are correct. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:50, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will this be addressed? Lilijuros (talk) 19:09, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing WP:TBAN shows that a topic-banned user will be blocked if they violate the topic ban. There are lots of problems or omissions in articles. If you are topic banned, you will have to leave such issues for other people. Topic bans include talk pages. Johnuniq (talk) 20:19, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]